Allowed

Sri. Chidanand S/O Sanna Hanumanthappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Feb 2024CRL.P/100263/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal petition seeks bail under Section 439 CrPC for the accused husband charged with dowry death under Section 302 IPC. The Single Judge allowed the bail application, observing strained marital relations, completed investigation, and no criminal antecedents as factors favoring liberty.

What did the court decide?

Accused directed to be enlarged on personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties and other standard bail conditions.

Sri. Chidanand S/O Sanna Hanumanthappa Vs the State of… — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:2777 CRL.P No. 100263 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100263 OF 2024 (439)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI CHIDANAND S/O. SANNA HANUMANTHAPPA, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. HALE JEERAL KALGUDI, TQ. KANAKAGIRI, DIST. KOPPAL, PIN-583283.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI SANTOSH B. MALAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH PSI, GANGAVATI RURAL POLICE STATION, R/BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD, PIN-580011.

¶13

Digitally VIJAYALAXMIM BHAT signed byVIJAYALAXMIM BHAT

¶14

(BY SRI T. P. MALIPATIL, AGA)

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ON BAIL ON SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS DEEMED FIT IN GANGAVATI RURAL P.S. CRIME NO.206/2023 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 498A, 302 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC AND U/S 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT 1961 IN SO FAR AS PRESENT PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 IS CONCERNED.

¶17

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC-D:2777 CRL.P No. 100263 of 2024

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Accused No.1 in Crime No.206/2023 registered by Gangavathi Rural Police Station, Koppal for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302 read with section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition

¶22

Act, 1961 is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶24

FIR in Crime No.206/2023 was registered by

¶25

Gangavathi Rural Police Station, Haveri against the petitioner and 5 others for the aforesaid offences on the complaint of one Manjunatha, who is the brother of deceased-Sharanamma. Petitioner is the husband of deceased-Sharanamma.

¶26

During the course of investigation in the said case, petitioner was arrested on 25.09.2023 and remanded to judicial custody. Investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed as against 4 persons. Petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1 in the

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2777 CRL.P No. 100263 of 2024

¶28

charge sheet. His parents are arrayed as accused Nos.2 and 3 and his brother is arrayed as accused No.4. Bail application filed before the Court of Additioanl District and Sessions Judge, Koppal sitting at Gangavathi in Crl.Misc.No.4/2024 was rejected on 16.01.2024.

¶29

Therefore, he is before this Court.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition prays to allow the petition.

¶31

Per contra , the learned High Court Government

¶32

Pleader has opposed the bail application.

¶33

The material on record would go to show that deceased-Sharanamma was married to the petitioner herein about 12 years prior to the date of complaint and from the said wedlock, they have two children. It appears that the relationship between the petitioner and his wife was strained and therefore, she has left the matrimonial house and was residing in her parents house for the last about two months prior to the complaint. As per the

¶34

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2777 CRL.P No. 100263 of 2024

¶35

complaint averments, on 24.09.2023, petitioner had visited his in-laws house with a request to send his wifeSharanamma along with him. Though, initially complainant and his family members were against the said request, in view of the assurance made by the petitioner that he will properly look after his wife, they had decided to send his wife along with him. Accordingly, on 25.09.2023 at about 5.30 p.m., petitioner allegedly took his wife-Sharanamma along with him in a motorcycle and left the house of complainant. At about 7.00 p.m., petitioner allegedly had called complainant’s uncle over his mobile phone and had informed him to come near the channel and take their daughter permanently home. Subsequently, on the next day at about 11.30 a.m., the dead body of Sharanamma was found floating in the channel and thereafter, a complaint was lodged at about 3.00 p.m. on 26.09.2023.

¶36

Undisputedly, the relationship between the petitioner and his wife was strained and she had left the matrimonial house and was staying in her parents’ house. Though, it is stated in the complaint as well as charge

¶37

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2777 CRL.P No. 100263 of 2024

¶38

sheet that the petitioner had informed the uncle of the complainant on 25.03.2023 at about 7.00 p.m. about the act committed by him, no action was taken to file any Police complaint immediately. Further, though the dead body of the deceased was found at about 11.30 a.m. on 26.09.2023, complaint was belatedly lodged at 3.00 p.m., inspite of fact that the petitioner had allegedly informed the uncle of the complainant on 25.09.2023 itself about the act committed by him. Investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed. The entire case of the prosecution is based on the circumstantial evidence. Undisputedly, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by him for grant of regular bail is required to be answered in the affirmative. Accordingly the following:

¶39

ORDER

¶40

Petition is allowed. The petitioner/accused No.1 is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.206/2023 registered by Gangavathi Rural Police Station, Koppal for

¶41

¶42

NC: 2024:KHC-D:2777 CRL.P No. 100263 of 2024

¶43

the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302 read

¶44

with section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, subject to the following conditions:

¶45

i. The petitioner/accused No.1 shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with 2 sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶46

ii. The petitioner/accused No.1 shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

¶47

iii. The petitioner/accused No.1 shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶48

iv. The petitioner/accused No.1 shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off.

¶49

KGK/CKK

¶50

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11

¶51

Sd/JUDGE

Sri. Chidanand S/O Sanna Hanumanthappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Chidanand S/O Sanna Hanumanthappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalappa S/O Raghuveer Rogannavar Vs the State of Karnataka

Kalappa S/O Raghuveer Rogannavar Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Madhavi Alias Sudha W/O Santosh Bhosale Alias Gondalli Vs State of Karnataka

Sri PRASHANt S/O Shivappa Hulkunde Vs Smt Bharati W/O Prashant Hulkunde

Mallappa S/O Sadashiv Uppar Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri. Kiran S/O Savanth Pawar Vs the State of Karnataka